Page 144 of 320 FirstFirst ... 4494134142143144145146154194244 ... LastLast
Results 1,431 to 1,440 of 3196

Thread: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

  1. #1431
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    03-22-17 @ 10:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    30,083

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by SlevinKelevra View Post
    where in the Constitution does it say the Bible is the law of the land.
    It does say the government can not prohibit the exercise of religion. Telling wedding chapples, wedding cake makers and etc that they have to perform a gay wedding, make a gay wedding cake and ect is a violation of their 1st amendment right to exercise their religion.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  2. #1432
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Kentucky
    Last Seen
    06-05-15 @ 07:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Communist
    Posts
    2,264

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17 View Post
    You are letting your anti-religion beliefs dictate your responses and that's due to the communism you embrace...

    I explained why churches are tax exempt, and why it's a perfectly understandable and reasonable. It's a measure put in place tseparatete the government from religious establishments, mainly as a fail-safe to ensure that the government can't infringe on the religious freedoms established in the first amendment of the Constitution.

    You ignored that and claiming that the tax exempt status should forbid or prevent leaders of religious establishments from voicing political opinions, then transformed the conversation into a rant against religion and it's place in America's history and culture.

    Sorry, but I'm not going to have that conversation because it isn't appropriate to this thread, or one I signed up for....
    And you have a bias in support of religion, see how this works out? I agree, best not to discuss it.

  3. #1433
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 01:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers


    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    This will clearly be declared unconstitutional if for nothing else being impractical in practice unless there's a companion bill that requires gay people to wear the scarlet letter. Otherwise, how would businesses know whether or not Governor Pence is gay? After all, there seem to be a lot of politicians capable of hiding their true sexuality, and politicians aren't known to be the sharpest knives in the drawer. Similar to the nonsense in Oregon, requiring businesses to declare their bigotry, this is just more sad stupidity.
    read the actual bill, or at least a summary of the bill. don't just read the cnn headline.

  4. #1434
    Sage
    Ahlevah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Flyoverland
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,423

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by SenorXm/Sirius View Post
    It is NOT identical to the Fed law, or Illinois law. All Indiana had to do would be to copy's Illinois law, but they didn't. They wrote their own which is much broader and has much fewer protections in it. Indy's RFRA is much different. The Indiana GOP Legislators and Pence just got caught pandering to extremists in the GOP.
    The Illinois law went into effect in 1998, before anyone would have expected the left-wingnuts at the Obama Administration to argue in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. that the federal RFRA didn't protect the Green family (owners of Hobby Lobby) because their company wasn't a "person" that could "exercise religion," even though the legal definition of person in this context was commonly understood to apply to "non-persons" such as corporations:

    Nothing in RFRA suggests a congressional intent to depart from the Dictionary Act definition of “person,” which “include[s] corporations, . . . as well as individuals.” 1 U. S. C. §1. The Court has entertained RFRA and free-exercise claims brought by nonprofit corporations. See, e.g., Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficiente União do Vegetal, 546 U. S. 418. And HHS’s concession that a nonprofit corporation can be a “person” under RFRA effectively dispatches any argument that the term does not reach for-profit corporations; no conceivable definition of “person” includes natural persons and nonprofit corporations, but not for-profit corporations. Pp. 19–20. (ii) HHS and the dissent nonetheless argue that RFRA does not cover Conestoga, Hobby Lobby, and Mardel because they cannot “exercise . . . religion.” They offer no persuasive explanation for this conclusion.

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...3-354_olp1.pdf
    When it comes to judges who apparently can't read a legal dictionary, you shouldn't leave anything to chance.
    Нава́льный 2018

  5. #1435
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    03-17-17 @ 06:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    41,908

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    1.)A lot of people who are not proponents of the homosexual agenda would say it is homosexuals who want special treatment.
    2.)I don't know what you are agreeing with. Certainly not the Supreme Court in Hurley or Dale, the decisions I was referring to. In both cases, the Court held the state law unconstitutional for forcing the public accommodation involved to propound a point of view contrary to its beliefs. Apparently you think that in those decisions, the Court was not only making "failed strawman" arguments but also making a "false and dishonest statement." I'm sure the justices would give your opinion about that all the weight it deserves.
    3.)You just finished saying how false and dishonest it was to argue that these laws unconstitutionally force people to propound points of view they do not believe. But that is exactly the basis--government-compelled speech--for the Court's decision in Hurley, which you say you are fine with. Which is it?
    4.)Of course Elaine was not discriminating against this woman just because she was a lesbian. She would gladly have done other types of photographs for her.
    5.) She simply disapproves of homosexual marriage, and if that makes a person a hypocrite or a bigo
    6.) then so are many millions of other Americans besides her.
    7.) I suppose to a proponent of the homosexual agenda, anyone who dares disagree with their views is necessarily a bigot.
    8.) I would say that kind of narrow-minded intolerance is itself bigotry.
    9.)Oh, I see. You and people who agree with you think you should be the final arbiters of whose religious beliefs are sincere, and whose are not. The law doesn't work that way. The Court in discussed in Hobby Lobby discussed in detail how its inquiry into the sincerity of the religious belief works. In that case, it found it was irrelevant whether some other person might argue that the four contraceptives Hobby Lobby's owners objected to were not really abortifacients. All that mattered was that they believed that they were, and therefore violated their religious belief that abortion is immoral.
    9.)That is anything but an easy question, and it will be up to the courts in the thirty-plus states that now have RFRA's to determine that in each case.
    1,) a lot people SAY alot of things but facts show otherwise
    theres no special treatment in equal rights
    2.) what i said and what you are trying to make it into are two different things lol. nce try thogh
    fact remains antidiscrimination laws and equal rights and civil rights dont "force acceptance"
    try sticking to what was actually said
    3.) wrong again, see #2
    4.) yeah yeah , i dont discriminant against black people, i serve them all the time they just have to come in the back and drink of out of thier own water fountain . . . . sounds so familiar. SOrry that is in fact discrimination based on sexual orientation as the case decided
    5.) the definition of the word makes her a bigot she see gays and thier marriages as lessers and dont think they are worthy of equal rights, that by definition is a bigot.
    she is a hypocrite IF she did any weddings that were not her exact religion, 1st marriages or any weddings that were not religious in any way.
    6.) doent matter how many americans are besides her, bigotry is bigotry and rights are rights. Well over 80% of the counrty was against interracial marriage at one time too meanignless to rights.
    7.) that proposal would be factually wrong because thats not what bigotry is at all, it has a clear definition
    8.) i agree 100% good thing nobody is doing that here and more importantly the intolerance has to actually take place.
    9.) wrong again, but please keep making up failed straw man they only further expose the failure of your argument
    the law works EQUAL thats how it is designed to work, SOME of these people want it to be unequal. Belifs do NOT play a role vs rights. Trying to twist what the actual ruling was wont work, WHat if hobbly lobby believe they could just kill people would that work? of course not. SO sorry that claim is 100% factually wrong it wasnt "all that mattered"
    10.) i wasnt sayign the question itself is easy i was saying its an easy question as in to ask and exposes the huge failure of the law.

    having thirty-plus states determine each case is mentally retarded and the exact opposite of how equal rights and civil rights works. If the question is that hard thats hows EXACTLY why its a horrible idea and people are going for special treatment, thank you for further pointing that out. Having 50 sets of rules or exceptions is not equal and stupid. Its simply just easier if we all go by the same rules and some people dont try to get special rules for themselves
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  6. #1436
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,486

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    UVA Law Prof Who Supports Gay Marriage Explains Why He Supports Indiana's Religious Freedom Law

    9:32 PM, Mar 29, 2015 • By JOHN MCCORMACKDouglas Laycock, a professor at the University of Virginia Law School, writes in an email:

    Read more...
    I've read it. Here's what he had to say: "There are hardly any cases about discrimination, and nobody has ever won a religious exemption from a discrimination law under a RFRA standard." If he's right, the answer is "No." Pence is trying to play this both ways - appease the anti-SSM/gay crowd AND the rest of the world with "this has nothing to do with teh geys - promise!"

    Pretty funny, actually.

  7. #1437
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 01:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Thorgasm View Post
    Can you refuse service on the mere suspicion of someone being gay?

    Say Larry Craig goes to a Christian bakery and orders urinal cakes?
    You can refuse service for a number of things, and it's perfectly legal. Haven't you seen the "no shirt, no shoes, no service" signs anywhere in your life?

    This gay thing is just the pet project of the legal arm of the left wing. That's really all it amounts to.

  8. #1438
    Bus Driver to Hell
    Thorgasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    03-22-17 @ 10:25 AM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    67,157

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    You can refuse service for a number of things, and it's perfectly legal. Haven't you seen the "no shirt, no shoes, no service" signs anywhere in your life?

    This gay thing is just the pet project of the legal arm of the left wing. That's really all it amounts to.
    Way to show that you don't have a very good understanding of the issue.

    Are you familiar with public accommodation laws?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry
    The Amish are light-years ahead of the rest of the human race.



  9. #1439
    Professor

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    01-12-17 @ 09:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,885

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Hari Seldon View Post
    No, not misinformed. Sanctioned "religious" bigotry, nothing less. They have already lost some business, I hope they lose a lot more. I read in Texass a similar law supported a cop who wouldn't work a gay pride parade. Very nice, I'm sure God approves.
    No not bigotry, there can be no religious bigotry in reaffirming religious freedom as it's practice is a protected right under the constitution. The idea that governmental institutions should be able to compel religious individuals to act against their own conscience (sincere religious belief) is outrageous.
    "It is only when men contemplate the greatness of God that they can come to realize their own inadequacy." Jean Calvin

  10. #1440
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,486

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    White House doesn't dispute it. etc.
    I got it. Again, if anyone voting for the law then had major interest groups promoting the law as a way to "protect" businesses and individuals "against those promoting homosexual marriage" then that's very relevant. We've been through this with the Federal law.

    You keep deliberately missing the point, but those with the "faux" outrage are just taking the right wing anti-SSM crowd at their word that this law was intended to target homosexuals and SSM. It is in the news now, and I don't think the sudden push in red states to pass RFRA type laws is a coincidence or because they're all suddenly worried about native American rituals etc...

    What would make the controversy go away is Indiana taking at least a partial step into the law like Utah did that explicitly protects gays - in Utah it was just in employment and housing, but that's a good first step. What's the harm?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •